谈医疗行为中患者知情同意权的实现

目前,关于患者的知情同意权的讨论引起了众多医院管理者的关注。对知情同意与医疗行为的矛盾冲突进行探讨,提出医疗行为为中实现患者知情同意的对策及伦理原则。     

大数据时代的知情同意

《纽伦堡法典》之后,知情同意原则逐渐成为世界医学界公认的保护患者和受试者权利的伦理原则。医学的发展离不开大数据的共享,也对知情同意原有模式提出了挑战。分析知情同意产生、发展以及在大数据时代面临的危机,在此基础上进一步分析数据挖掘与使用中的伦理问题,并探讨医学发展与知情同意原则维护之间的关系。最后在对当前学界研究进展进行综述的基础上,提出建立新型知情同意模式的必要性。     

《侵权责任法》视域中患者知情不同意的法律思考

患者知情同意原则本质地内涵着患者知情不同意的权利,医方对患者知情不同意更应谨慎处理.针对患者知情不同意的不同类型,在实践中适用《侵权责任法》时应当注意替代同意的效力问题,明确医方告知的信息范围和告知方式,并在患者拒绝治疗后谨慎处理医生干涉权和患者自主权之间的关系.     

医疗知情同意的法伦理思考

医疗知情同意是一项伦理原则,也是一项法律原则.虽然不同视角下的医疗知情同意具有相对不同的要求,但两者在本质上是一致的.尊重患者的知情同意权是患者和社会对医方所提出的要求,也是医方应尽的法律和伦理义务.因此,从法伦理视角审视知情同意原则,以凸显其丰富的内涵及其情、理、法的融合与统一.     

知情同意原则的中国化:一种生命伦理学视角的转换

知情同意原则的中国化是我国生命伦理学中的一个理论难点.有学者主张可以在知情同意原则的实践上实现个人自决与家庭决策的并立共存,也有学者认为应当运用多元道德理论来对知情同意原则进行论证.然而,知情同意原则中国化的更为可行的方式是认识到“自主”理论下的知情同意原则的限度,并重新确立医学“行善”原则的核心地位.通过这种理论视角的转变,知情同意原则的中国化就不再是一个难解的问题.     

从中西文化差异审视知情同意

中西文化差异的核心是价值观的差异,西方文化强调个人主义,中国文化强调家庭主义.知情同意作为生命伦理学的重要原则,是西方个人主义文化的产物.移植到家庭本位的中国文化语境中,因价值观、行为方式和社会制度方面的差异,知情同意遇到了患者知情同意而家属知情不同意、家属知情同意而患者知情不同意的困境.对此,医方应做好协调沟通工作,一般情况应首先尊重患者意见.     

医疗知情同意的法伦理思考

医疗知情同意是一项伦理原则,也是一项法律原则。虽然不同视角下的医疗知情同意具有相对不同的要求,但两者在本质上是一致的。尊重患者的知情同意权是患者和社会对医方所提出的要求,也是医方应尽的法律和伦理义务。因此,从法伦理视角审视知情同意原则,以凸显其丰富的内涵及其情、理、法的融合与统一。     

知情同意在我国临床医疗中的实施

知情同意在我国至少已倡导与实践了20年,由伦理要求上升到法律准则无疑是一个跨越式的进步。当前,医院落实知情同意的实践滞后于患者要求,除了主观方面的原因外,客观上存在知情同意与保护性医疗,病人自主权与医生处置权、医学对疾病的已知与未知等诸多盾与难点。要使知情同意在我国临床医疗中真正落实尚有许多工作要做;提高医务人员尊重病人权利的意识;完善执行知情同意的方式与程序;细化与知情同意的实施原则;营造良好的社会氛围,探索非西方环境下知情同意实现途径。     

心理咨询和治疗的知情同意原则及其影响因素

随着心理咨询和治疗的发展,患者的知情同意成为临床心理学实践的一个基本伦理观念和原则。首先提出心理咨询和治疗实践中的知情同意问题,介绍心理咨询和治疗知情同意的要素、过程、内容、意义和影响因素,并附心理咨询和治疗提供给患者的知情同意问卷,旨在引起从业者的注意和重视,并在临床实践中自觉地遵守。     

《中华医学百科全书·医学伦理学卷》条目选载(一)

正知情同意(Informed Consent)指在疾病诊疗、预防、公共卫生、医学科研及其他医学实践活动中,患者及患者家属、受试者、公众享有知情和同意的权利;知情同意是医学伦理学最重要的伦理学原则之一,是自主原则在医疗实践中的具体应用,是医疗卫生服务人员和科研人员对患者、享受医疗保健各种服务和受试者个人权利的尊重的承诺。概述现代意义上的知情同意,起始于1946年对德国纳粹战犯的纽伦堡军事法庭决议部分内容的《纽伦     

贯彻落实患者知情同意权刻不容缓

近年来,有关知情同意权方面的医疗纠纷在全部医疗纠纷事件中所占比重的逐年上升,贯彻落实知情同意权越发显得刻不容缓。本文着重从医疗管理角度出发,探讨如何做好相关宣传学习及完善相关制度。     

临床麻醉中知情同意的思考

临床麻醉工作中,尊重患者自主权是知情同意的基础,知情同意反映了患者自主权与医学干涉主义之间的相互妥协。在信任基础上的知情同意,是患者自主权的最佳体现,也是对医学干涉主义的尊重,从而为患者的利益提供服务。     

“拔牙要签同意书案”的知情同意探究

让患者知情同意义务是近些年来在医疗诉讼过程中逐步从一般注意义务中分化出来的特殊注意义务。但如何确定患者知情同意,如何界定医生行使告知义务时的信息披露程度,一直没有一个确定的标准,在法律、医患沟通、医疗保险制度等方面还有许多要完善的地方。     

Informed Consent

Summary

This article focuses on informed consent and the components to be reviewed with clients in the first session or as early as possible thereafter. Recent changes that give patients greater autonomy in the treatment process are also presented. The process of obtaining informed consent or informed refusal places a new responsibility on the practitioner. Informed consent as it pertains to clinical practice, supervision and training, and psychological research is also discussed.     

Research without Consent: Exception from and Waiver of Informed Consent in Resuscitation Research

The ethical concept of Informed Consent provides individuals with the right and the opportunity to approve of events that will occur regarding his or her own person. In medicine, informed consent is obtained for treatment and for research participation. However, under some circumstances, prospective informed consent cannot be obtained because of the devastating clinical condition of the patient. In emergency circumstances, treatment is never withheld if obtaining informed consent from a critically ill person is not possible or if a delay while seeking surrogates would further endanger life. In emergency research circumstances, waiving informed consent for study participation is fraught with additional ethical considerations. This article will review a presentation given at the June 2, 2006 conference entitled “The Ethics of Research in Emergency Medicine”. An earlier version of this paper was presented at: The 7th International Conference on Bioethics on “The Ethics of Research in Emergency Medicine”, held on June 2, 2006, Warsaw, Poland.     

正确理解知情同意

知情同意最初由美国于18世纪末19世纪初提出,随着社会不断进步,医学科学的不断发展,人们权力意识的不断增强,知情同意作为患者享有的一项权力,医务人员在医疗过程中应遵循的一条原则已日益到人们的关注。然而在现实的医疗实践中人们对这一的理解和认识还存在一定的偏差。正确理解,践行知情同意既是尊重患者的权利,贯彻“以病人为中心”的原则的保证,也能有效地保护医务人员的合法权益。     

知情同意—患者的权利与困境

知情同意是目前被广为认可的一项病人权利。从历史渊源看,它可以分为出于医生权威的知情同意与出于尊重患者人格、尊严、个性化权利的知情同意。尽管东西方对权利主体的强调不一致,但都是出于医疗行善的目的。这并不一定能保证病人的真正利益。现实中,有必要对这一权利做一定的限制。     

知情同意的临床实践存在的问题及对策

临床医疗实践中贯彻实施知情同意原则旨在保护病人的权益不受侵犯,然而知情同意原则实施起来并不简单,它常常会受到主客体两方面种种因素的制约,陷入意想不到的困境。分析了知情同意原则在实施过程中可能出现的一些难以回避的问题,并针对这些问题探讨了若干对策。     

Informed Consent Procedure for Clinical Trials in Emergency Settings: The Polish Perspective

Setting reasonable and fair limits of emergency research acceptability in ethical norms and legal regulations must still adhere to the premise of well-being of the research subject over the interests of science and society. Informed consent of emergency patients to be enrolled in clinical trials is a particularly difficult issue due to impaired competencies of patients’ to give consent, short diagnostic and therapeutic windows, as well as the requirement to provide detailed information to participants. Whereas the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical Practice guideline, Additional Protocol to the European Bioethical Convention concerning Biomedical Research, as well as appropriate regulations adopted by the Food and Drugs Administration (USA) allow waivers from participants’ consent or deferred consent for emergency research, the regulations of most European Community countries following the Clinical Trial Directive (2001/20/EC) do not give space for a deferred consent or a waiver from consent for adult patients (unless surrogate consent is made use of). This is even more confusing in case of Poland, where conflicting regulations on a waiver from a participant’s consent in emergency research exist and the regulations on surrogate consent of temporarily incompetent adults are too restrictive and authorise only the guardianship courts to consent, which is not or hardly feasible in practice. European Community regulations need to be amended to allow for implementation of the deferred consent or waivers from consent for emergency research in order to enable ethical research of emergency conditions that should become a large part of important public health priorities.     

Informed Consent at Gunpoint: When Psychiatry Affects Gun Ownership

As states take more steps to connect patients’ gun ownership to their mental health, psychiatrists are being asked to provide mental health information after clinical interviews as well as after confiscation. This move into the patient–physician relationship raises new questions about how psychiatrists should obtain informed consent when interviews may result in reports to legal authorities. Consent warnings are already practiced more in the breach than in the observance and informed consent is imperfect at its best. In communities torn by controversies surrounding gun control, vehement political views will further influence these established themes to result in unprecedented pressures on patient confidentiality. This analysis draws on new movements in ethical theory and behavioral medicine that go beyond balancing principles to question the use of psychiatry in firearm reporting, and support a vigorous practice of informed consent to protect both individuals and the communities they live in. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.